Reporters accused of cover-up of Biden decrepitude

 Ed Morrissey:

According to a recent ABC News/Ipsos poll, 86% of Americans now believe Joe Biden's too old to serve as president. The mainstream media's fluffing of Biden and deflection to the fitness of Donald Trump hasn't fooled most voters, and that includes 73% of Democrats. 

In fact, the mainstream media hasn't even fooled itself. Now that Robert Hur has exposed the Rehoboth Beach Emperor as having no clothes, Puck's Dylan Byers reports that White House correspondents knew it all along. In fact, they have little trouble discussing with each other, but balked at informing their readers and viewers to suit their own tastes:

This week, I surveyed members of the White House press corps—reporters, on-air correspondents, photographers, etcetera—and they all emphasized that the symptoms of Biden’s age had become more noticeable in recent months and a frequent discussion topic at the desks behind the Brady briefing room. “Anyone who covers this White House knows he’s showing the signs of his age—he whispers, he shuffles, he misremembers,” one White House reporter told me. “Anyone with an elderly parent knows what this is.”

Since the beginning of Biden’s term, many White House journalists have reported on, or alluded to, concerns surrounding Biden’s age in often gentle or euphemistic ways. Nevertheless, several of the journalists I spoke with said the true significance and importance of that issue, as they observed it, was not reflected in the coverage—often due to the sense that it was sensitive or unseemly, or because there was no obvious evidence that it had affected his performance as president beyond optics. Or, left unsaid, perhaps because they didn’t want to ruin their relationship with the White House by being the lone wolf to speak up.“It was something that felt indelicate to talk about,” one member of the White House press corps told me. In retrospect, some journalists felt like it probably warranted more coverage: “The amount of time we spent talking about it versus the time we spent reporting on it was not the same,” one of the reporters said. “There should have been tougher, more scrutinizing coverage of his age earlier.”

This report is behind Puck's paywall, but it's accessible as a trial article -- assuming you haven't already exercised that option. Byers has a long track record of political media analysis, so his perspective usually has value. If you can't access the source, click here for a screencap, but it's usually better to reward original reporting, especially in this instance ... where the lack of original reporting is precisely the issue.

Of late, we hear plenty from the news industry about a "crisis" for democracy as their platforms downsize or fail. They are a necessity for a well-informed republic, media professionals insist, But how can they make that argument while at the same time refusing to actually inform the public, especially about a critical failure at the head of government and state? I don't doubt for a moment what Byers reports as the excuses from the White House press cohort, but excuses are precisely what they are.

What is "sensitive and unseemly" about reporting a cognitive incapacitation of a sitting US president? This isn't about an affair; it's not a private issue in any way under these circumstances. The incapacitation of a president or governor is not a matter of "delicacy," either. 

...

It is hard to hide even as Biden dodges public engagements with the media.  I fet the impression that his staff and family are doing their best to cover for his dementia but it is still there for those willing to see it. 

See also:

Biden stumbles toward the exit

And:

 Joe Biden, His Alzheimer’s Disease and Jill Biden’s Coverup

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Apple's huge investment in US including Texas facility